Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonic Soak

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sandstein 18:21, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Sonic Soak

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Sonic Soak (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotion for a non-notable product. Most of the references are advertorials. power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:03, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Keep. "Advertorial" has a very specific meaning: paid advertising masquerading as editorial copy. I do not think the term can be appropriately applied to these references. Most of the references appear to be a journalist saying "This looks cool" and writing independently about the topic. In particular, The Irish Times is a newspaper of record, and the writer for The Irish Times is a staff business reporter. https://www.irishtimes.com/profile/ciara-o-brien-7.1010748 So even if the manufacturer has mailed out dozens of samples to journalists around the world (and I do not think this is the case), reporters and editors have decided that the technology is newsworthy independently and without payment. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:27, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

That's true, but the journalists may have relied a little too heavily on press releases. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:01, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:28, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Look it is covered by Yahoo [1], The Irish Times2, Engadget 3, PopSugar 4, Futura-Sciences 5, Tom's Hardware6, Digital Trends7, Government Technology8, The Siasat Daily9, Deccan Chronicle10, Core77 11, Mashable12.

• Delete Pure commercial blurb. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:59, 15 July 2018 (UTC).
• Delete Commercial, with very minor sources. The Irish Times is just one source, and it's a short piece (111 words) appropriately headed "This supersonic gizmo will clean your stuff on the go". I'm sure that Ciara O'Brien is a fine journalist but this wasn't her finest hour. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:01, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

The Sonic Soak is covered by Yahoo [2], The Irish Times2, Engadget 3, PopSugar 4, Futura-Sciences 5, Tom's Hardware6, Digital Trends7, Government Technology8, The Siasat Daily9, Deccan Chronicle10, Core77 11, Mashable12. There is deep coverage in the media. Gharee (talk) 14:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Keep It is covered by Yahoo [3], The Irish Times2, Engadget 3, PopSugar 4, Futura-Sciences 5, Tom's Hardware6, Digital Trends7, Government Technology8, The Siasat Daily9, Deccan Chronicle10, Core77 11, Mashable12. There is deep coverage in the media. Gharee (talk) 14:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• Delete for now. The articles seem to me more focused on the fundraising campaign and claims made as part of the campaign than on the actual product or company. As of right now there is no product. Some of the sources link to the company’s promotional video rather than to their own reviews which might have a bit more editorial heft. No opinion on whether this is a viable widget, but at this point, there is no widget, just a fundraising campaign that has attracted some media to claims made by the company. TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 14:14, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• Delete one splash from a press release with an intriguing idea doesn't make a notable product. Deserves a footnote under crowd-sourcing. See also Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Product reviews. --Bejnar (talk) 04:38, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.